Full Series Missed or wasted opportunities in the show?

The 3 movies, were to show Anakin on how and why he turned to the Dark Side, and wouldn't have time to flesh out Obi-Wan's and Anakin's friendship while in the show The Clone Wars, they had plenty of time to flesh it out which it did.

 

I don't think they did that well either. The time could have easily been made. But that isn't the topic of this thread, my apologies for going OT.

I think not showing [more of] Ahsoka and Barriss' friendship was a mistake, considering what happened in the fugitive arc.

 

One thing I've been thinking of for awhile is TCW movie (or some episode) should have had a scene with the Lars family. Anakin needed more scenes with them in general and in particular there should have been a moment with the Lars clan pleading with Anakin to stay. To leave the war behind and stay with the closest thing to a family he has left. Instead, he chooses to follow Obi Wan on that, "damned fool idealistic crusade."

 

It would have been cool if he and Obi-Wan did meet up with the Lars, and maybe stuck around for a little while, so he can build a locate beacon device that would help free the slaves on Tatooine. Now, that would have been something to see.

 

Did we ever get something to explain the "You served my father in the Clone Wars" line from Leia?

 

IIRC The Clone Wars: Wild Space touched on this. Nothing on screen though.

 

I really wanted them to take more time showing Anakin's slow, piece-by-piece descent into the dark side. They did to some degree... but that was a hole that needed more filling in.

 

Obsession is the answer.

 

IMO they didn't need to address where the name "Ben" came from. When I was a kid, it was my fanon that "Ben" was his birth name while "Obi-Wan" was some Jedi name bestowed upon him. As I got older, it made more sense that "Ben" was a name he adopted to hide (though it still doesn't make sense as to why he didn't change his last name instead). And it makes even less sense if he changes his name to "Ben" in order to hide from the Empire, if Vader would be familiar with the fact that Ben was a code name his old master used during the Clone Wars. If he discovered that there was a "Ben Kenobi" on Tatooine, that's one hell of a bad disguise. If he went by the name "Ben Falafel" then perhaps Vader would think nothing of it.

Personally, I would have left the explanation for the name Ben a mystery. Or let the EU explain that it was a name that Obi-Wan used when he was still an apprentice under Qui-Gon, that Anakin never knew of, or something like that.

 

You know, I had this reoccurring fantasy of Exar Kun, one of the greatest of all the Dark Lords, featuring in an episode. Yeah, his soul is trapped on Yavin IV...but I'd still love to see him.

 

Mentioning Naboo's rare plasma resources in one of the Naboo based arcs would have been cool. It would explain the power plant facility and what benefited the Trade Federation when they invaded.

 

There was a passing reference to the plasma mines in Crisis on Naboo.

 

The Blue Virus plot should have skipped the virus and just done something with that. Vindi should have been hijacking their power plants rather than... doing whatever it was doing... bumming around in the swamps on a virus-hugging campaign or whatever it was.

 

Right...like sabotaging the plasma power plant to explode the planet or something.

 

I've got one- everything. More seriously, General Grievous and Savage Oppress. I'd say Darth Maul, but he was never really an opportunity in the first place.

 

I would have liked to have seen more of the "background" skullduggery within the Republic itself.

The show makes it seem like Sidious just swans his way into power, but a look at the EU matieral (such as Travis' "Order 66") makes it pretty clear that there were a LOT of people who knew/suspected something was up and were either looking into it or making plans to escape it.

Sidious had to constantly work to keep his secrets secure and thwart various attempts at getting closer to the truth.

I also second the suggestion of a more extensive look at the "disillusioned" Jedi (Travis dealt with them as well in her book).

 

actually, there were a number of Fett clones still in service all the way up to (and some through) the Galactic Civil War (OT). The 501st was still at least half Fett clones as late as ANH, but they lost a large number of those on the first Death Star.

 

501st? What were they? 60 years old?

 

No, the oldest of them (first generation clones, assuming any that old survived) would have been about 31 at the time of ANH. Allowing for the growth acceleration to bring them to their physical prime (say 20 years physical age) they'd still only be ~41. We have active duty servicemen that old and our health care technology isn't anywhere near as good as the SW universe.

According to Wookiepedia, the Fett cloning program continued until the Clone Rebellion on Kaimino in ~9BBY. That would make the youngest Fett clones somewhere between 20 and 29 in physical years (assuming that the Emperor didn't order the destruction of undecanted clones that had not been "corrupted" yet).

 

Another thing they could have brought up is why the Sith didn't clone a bunch of evil Jedi to wreak havoc in the Galaxy during the war, or explain why they couldn't, if that's the case.

 

I think it's something that we all - as Star Wars fans with varying levels of knowledge of the EU - take for granted, but I think some kind of elaboration on why there is a Rule of Two would have been nice, as well as why Yoda knows about this.

Yoda says ALWAYS two there are which coupled with the fact that Ki-Adi-Mundi says the Sith have been extinct for a millennium and Yoda himself is not 1,000 years old, then the easiest conclusion to arrive at is that he is speaking from knowledge he has read and that the Sith have followed the Rule of Two for longer than 1,000 years.

I've heard people mention here before that in the EU Yoda learns about the Rule of Two because there are rumors about the Sith having survived and that there are only two of them or something like that (I apologize if I'm misrepresenting what actually happens in the EU). But it's weird for Lucas and Filoni to just assume that there audience that consists of thousands upon thousands of people knows of this convoluted EU answer. And Lucas himself acknowledges in commentary that there was once many Sith that destroyed themselves by fighting over power and that the rule was then established 1,000 years ago to prevent further self-destruction. Yet he never thought to include such explanations in the films or TV show itself?

And I think that things like Asajj Ventress and Savage complicate things more. We know that they are not Sith because there can only be two and because there is the concept of Dark Jedi. But I suspect heavily that if I were a 10 year old watching this show, I would think that anyone following the Dark Side and having a red lightsaber is a Sith. I wouldn't know what the EU says on the matter. Some promotional materials would make reference to Savage and Ventress as being Sith -- to the irritation of some fans, while Filoni would insist that they are not Sith, but again in commentaries, not in the show itself where such information would be the most welcome. If I recall, Ahsoka even refers to Asajj as a Sith in the finale arc. If I'm a kid, I'm going to take that information for granted as true.

-No explanation as to why there is a Rule of Two (there are some vague implications, but nothing direct).

-It's unclear - without reading the EU - as to how it can be resolved that Yoda knows the rules of the believed-to-be-extinct Sith, when those rules only came to be since they went into hiding.

-And it was never articulated effectively as to why Asajj or Savage is not a Sith or what exactly the Sith do differently and why Asajj's existence as Dooku's apprentice does not break the rule, when there is dialogue and promotional materials that I imagine would have to complicate things for the target age group, the bulk of which I would doubt is watching commentaries.

 

No explanation for the Rule of Two is a failing of the PT. TCW fixes enough of the PT's failings, the PT's failings are its own, not TCW's.